LINCOLN v. POWER

ResetAA Font size: Print

United States Supreme Court

LINCOLN v. POWER, (1916)

No. 793

Argued:     Decided: May 1, 1916

Per Curiam:

Judgment affirmed with costs upon the authority of (1) Re Oteiza y Cortes, 136 U.S. 330, 334 , 34 S. L. ed. 464, 466, 10 Sup. Ct. Rep. 1031, 8 Am. Crim. Rep. 241; Ornelas v. Ruiz, 161 U.S. 502, 508 , 40 S. L. ed. 787, 789, 16 Sup. Ct. Rep. 689; [241 U.S. 651, 652]   Bryant v. United States, 167 U.S. 104, 105 , 42 S. L. ed. 94, 95, 17 Sup. Ct. Rep. 744; Terlinden v. Ames, 184 U.S. 270, 278 , 46 S. L. ed. 534, 541, 22 Sup. Ct. Rep. 484, 12 Am. Crim. Rep. 424; Elias v. Ramirez, 215 U.S. 398, 406 , 407 S., 54 L. ed. 253, 256, 257, 30 Sup. Ct. Rep. 131; McNamara v. Henkel, 226 U.S. 520, 523 , 57 S. L. ed. 330, 332, 33 Sup. Ct. Rep. 146; (2) David Kaufman & Sons Co. v. Smith, 216 U.S. 610 , 54 L. ed. 636, 30 Sup. Ct. Rep. 419; Toop v. Ulysses Land Co. 237 U.S. 580 , 59 L. ed. 1127, 35 Sup. Ct. Rep. 739; Manila Invest. Co. v. Trammell, 239 U.S. 31 , 60 L. ed . --, 36 Sup. Ct. Rep. 12.

Mr. Addison S. Pratt for appellant.

Mr. Charles Fox for appellee.

FindLaw Career Center


      Post a Job  |  View More Jobs

    View More